News-Press trial focuses on bias

BY ERIC LINDBERG
DAILY SOUND STAFF WRITER

After a week-long break, the federal hearing into allegedly illegal firings at the Santa Barbara News-Press resumed yesterday with former reporter Melinda Burns returning to the stand as defense attorney Barry Cappello continued his cross examination.
Later in the afternoon, federal attorneys called on former business editor Michael Todd to testify, focusing on his work with Burns and how the newsroom operated during his time as an editor.

Burns is one of eight reporters that National Labor Relations Board and union attorneys allege was illegally fired for union activities. News-Press attorneys contend that the newspaper’s management dismissed Burns for biased reporting and others for disloyalty.
As Burns returned to the witness stand, Cappello focused on demands made by unionizing employees delivered in a letter to editorial page editor Travis Armstrong and later included on subscription cancellation cards distributed to the community.
Cappello noted a discrepancy between the two sets of demands, namely that the first demand in the Armstrong letter had been left off the cancellation cards. Burns testified that the union group had decided to drop that demand, which asked management to invite the six editors who quit in July 2006 to come back to the paper.
Cappello took exception to that demand and another asking the newspaper to restore journalistic integrity and ethics, telling the judge they were made “for the sole purpose of harming the News-Press” and arguing that they should not be considered protected union activity.
NLRB attorney Brian Gee said the federal case will not rely on that as a protected union activity, but refused to concede that it was not protected activity.
Cappello then questioned Burns on the issue of restoring journalistic integrity and ethics to the newsroom, asking when she felt those standards had been violated.
Burns testified that the first indication came when newspaper management prevented a story about the sentencing of Armstrong for a DUI violation from running in the paper. She also cited reprimands issued to a reporter and three editors for running the address of a lot in Montecito owned by actor Rob Lowe where plans for a house were being discussed by the Planning Commission.
Questioning Burns on language from the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, Cappello asked her if she felt there was an “overriding public need” to publish Lowe’s address. Burns answered in the affirmative, that the project had been a contentious issue with upset neighbors complaining at public hearings, calling the printing of an address in similar circumstances a standard practice at the News-Press.
“It has always been the standard of the newspaper ... to put the address of the development at issue in the paper,” Burns later clarified under questioning by Judge William G. Kocol, adding that letting the publisher prevent an address from being published would set a “bad precedent” for developing honest, fair reporting.
Burns also testified that running a story on Armstrong’s DUI sentencing had an overriding public need, explaining to Judge Kocol that although such an event would not be covered for most residents, Armstrong is a prominent figure in the community and warranted such coverage.
Later, while being questioned by Gee, Burns also testified that Rob Lowe had not built a house and was not living on the property at the time. Cappello had attempted to argue earlier that publishing Lowe’s address would invite stalkers to that location who may threaten Lowe’s family, a line of questioning the judge did not permit.
Cappello turned his focus to union activity conducted by Burns before and after her dismissal from the paper. First, he questioned the reporter on whether she intended to be disloyal during a speech she had given at a union rally, eliciting objections from the prosecution, who argued that her intent is not relevant.
Judge Kocol sustained that and other objections as Cappello continued to question Burns as to her intent at that rally and on the footbridge on Anapamu Street where reporters hung a banner reading “Cancel Your Newspaper Today!” The judge reminded Cappello that he will consider the conduct and content of the signs and speeches and not the intent of those involved in the activities.
Cappello shifted Burns’ attention to performance evaluations she received during her time at the News-Press, pointing out that she did not comment on mentions of bias in drafts of her stories and reporting. Burns agreed that she never responded to those comments, but that she “took it to heart.”
The defense attorney also brought up a story concerning Measure D that Burns wrote in October, asking the reporter if she included the editorial stance of the News-Press in her story as a counter to Measure D support cited in the story. Burns said she did not, explaining later under questioning by Gee that she was never told to refer to the editorial stance and considered it key to maintaining the credibility of the newspaper to keep a separation between the news and editorial content.
Cappello’s final line of questioning focused on personal e-mails and letters penned by Burns that contained language he said denigrated News-Press owner and publisher Wendy McCaw.
Union attorney Ira Gottlieb objected, calling that area of questioning an attempt to intimidate former and current News-Press employees and arguing that it will cause a “chilling effect” on future union activity.
“They’re discouraged from engaging in activities that they would normally engage in,” Gottlieb said.
Cappello argued that the issue will show that Burns’ actions following her discharge from the paper prohibit her from receiving reinstatement and back pay. The judge allowed the questions, providing that Cappello provide evidence of any statements by Burns he referred to in his examination.
Cappello wrapped up his questioning after entering into evidence several e-mails and letters in which Burns complained about McCaw’s management of the News-Press.
Federal attorneys then called to the stand Michael Todd, a former News-Press employee who worked as a copy editor, nation and world editor, assistant metro editor and finally as the business editor at the newspaper before resigning on July 6, 2006.
Gee first led Todd through the general production process at the News-Press during his time there, following a daily story from its assignment to an extensive editing process to its final appearance in the newspaper.
Todd explained how the assigning editor, a top editor and two copy editors examined the story, looking for issues ranging from bias and libel to spelling and grammar errors. To remedy any problems, he said the editors would typically discuss the story with the reporter and try to iron out any kinks.
As a direct supervisor for Burns, Todd testified that they had a good working relationship and that his conservative nature generally balanced out her liberal stance to produce exceptional work.
“We complemented each other,” Todd said.
He said while bias did tend to creep into her initial story drafts, he never had a problem with any story that appeared in print, adding that she “really welcomed” editing and he didn’t feel she required serious counseling for her issues with bias.
Gee also questioned Todd on a reprimand he received for the Rob Lowe incident as an editor of the reporter who penned the story including Lowe’s address. Todd said he responded in writing to McCaw after receiving the reprimand.
“I didn’t believe the reprimands she had passed out were warranted,” Todd said.
Todd testified that three hours after delivering that response, he was suspended indefinitely for an incident that occurred six weeks earlier. Details of that incident came out later under cross examination by Cappello, when Todd admitted that he had told a photographer that he saw her standing near the street while driving one day and was going to swerve and run her over but didn’t because there were other people with her.
Todd also admitted that he later told the photographer he didn’t want to run her over because “a bullet is cheaper.” He characterized his statements as “black humor,” adding that he found out later that they had upset the photographer.
After several questions concerning Todd’s method of counseling his reporters, Cappello finished his cross examination and Judge Kocol called the hearing for the day. Testimony will resume at 9 a.m. today at the Bankruptcy Court building on State Street.